Akademska digitalna zbirka SLovenije - logo
E-resources
Peer reviewed Open access
  • Eribulin versus dacarbazine...
    Blay, Jean-Yves; Schöffski, Patrick; Bauer, Sebastian; Krarup-Hansen, Anders; Benson, Charlotte; D'Adamo, David R; Jia, Yan; Maki, Robert G

    British journal of cancer, 05/2019, Volume: 120, Issue: 11
    Journal Article

    This subgroup analysis of a phase 3 study compares outcomes for eribulin versus dacarbazine in patients with leiomyosarcoma. Patients ≥18 years old with advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma, ECOG PS ≤2, and ≥2 prior treatment regimens were randomly assigned (1:1) to eribulin mesylate (1.4 mg/m² intravenously on day 1 and day 8) or dacarbazine (either 850, 1000, or 1200 mg/m² intravenously) every 21 days until disease progression. The primary end point was OS; additional end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). 309 Patients with leiomyosarcoma were included (eribulin, n = 157; dacarbazine, n = 152). Median age was 57 years; 42% of patients had uterine disease and 57% had nonuterine disease. Median OS was 12.7 versus 13.0 months for eribulin versus dacarbazine, respectively (hazard ratio HR = 0.93 95% CI 0.71-1.20; P = 0.57). Median PFS (2.2 vs 2.6 months, HR = 1.07 95% CI 0.84-1.38; P = 0.58) and ORR (5% vs 7%) were similar between eribulin- and dacarbazine-treated patients. Grade ≥3 TEAEs occurred in 69% of patients receiving eribulin and 59% of patients receiving dacarbazine. Efficacy of eribulin in patients with leiomyosarcoma was comparable to that of dacarbazine. Both agents had manageable safety profiles.